Post by Dr.Death on Sept 1, 2012 17:41:42 GMT -12
So what did everyone think of this attempt at a remake ? I thought it was bad, not because of the content necessarily, but it just overall had nothing to offer .
Everyone knows origin stories usually are always annoying to sit through, because they have to get the back story out of the way before they can establish the story. Of coarse there's the adjustment to a new actor playing an iconic role, and Jakie earl Haley, while seeming like a good idea on paper, much like Malcolm McDowell's being cast s professor loomis, fell flat on screen.
I can think of absolutely nothing that Jackie offered to his performance that made a difference between him and anyone else being cast in that role. The make-up, which everyone seems to hate, I loved.
As some know I'm a stickler for special FX make-up techniques and I thought the change was bold and aesthetically appealing. A nice mix between fantasy and realism. Well not really a mix, it focused more on realism then fantasy about 70/30 , with a 3rd and 4th degree skin graft look. Arguably much more realistic then the look we're accustomed to, but much less effective. The cliched CGI aspect to the make-up really seemed forced as well. I don't think it was needed at all. The exposed cheek muscle effect could have been done without it, effectively.
I guess the selling point to this film besides the novelty of it being a remake with a new lead , was the brand new darker tone, less comedy angle with the "pedophilia" theme being explored that was only hinted at in the original series. Freddy had become such an iconic figure they kind of heavily diluted any indication that Freddy actually molested any of the spring wood kids, as if just murdering them was some how more acceptable.
I don't know whether it was always intended or just Robert Englunds overtly sexual tones in his performance, (the flicking tongue thing) but Freddy's always seemed perverted qualities about him.
Never the less, this was the first time it was really explored. Too bad it was in such a convoluted way. Could somebody please tell me what the purpose of him having his famous knife glove weapon in the first place if he had only been molesting the kids ? what was the glove for if they weren't murdered ?
Over all it was just very lack luster movie. What's the point of remaking the film in this day and age if your not going to utilize all the amazing things that can be done in movies now as apposed to back in 84. I wouldn't have minded good cgi it they used t to help create some great dream sequence effects. All it was was an over stylized waste of a reboot. And those "teenagers" looked old as hell.
I give it a 2 out of 10.
What do you guys think ?
Everyone knows origin stories usually are always annoying to sit through, because they have to get the back story out of the way before they can establish the story. Of coarse there's the adjustment to a new actor playing an iconic role, and Jakie earl Haley, while seeming like a good idea on paper, much like Malcolm McDowell's being cast s professor loomis, fell flat on screen.
I can think of absolutely nothing that Jackie offered to his performance that made a difference between him and anyone else being cast in that role. The make-up, which everyone seems to hate, I loved.
As some know I'm a stickler for special FX make-up techniques and I thought the change was bold and aesthetically appealing. A nice mix between fantasy and realism. Well not really a mix, it focused more on realism then fantasy about 70/30 , with a 3rd and 4th degree skin graft look. Arguably much more realistic then the look we're accustomed to, but much less effective. The cliched CGI aspect to the make-up really seemed forced as well. I don't think it was needed at all. The exposed cheek muscle effect could have been done without it, effectively.
I guess the selling point to this film besides the novelty of it being a remake with a new lead , was the brand new darker tone, less comedy angle with the "pedophilia" theme being explored that was only hinted at in the original series. Freddy had become such an iconic figure they kind of heavily diluted any indication that Freddy actually molested any of the spring wood kids, as if just murdering them was some how more acceptable.
I don't know whether it was always intended or just Robert Englunds overtly sexual tones in his performance, (the flicking tongue thing) but Freddy's always seemed perverted qualities about him.
Never the less, this was the first time it was really explored. Too bad it was in such a convoluted way. Could somebody please tell me what the purpose of him having his famous knife glove weapon in the first place if he had only been molesting the kids ? what was the glove for if they weren't murdered ?
Over all it was just very lack luster movie. What's the point of remaking the film in this day and age if your not going to utilize all the amazing things that can be done in movies now as apposed to back in 84. I wouldn't have minded good cgi it they used t to help create some great dream sequence effects. All it was was an over stylized waste of a reboot. And those "teenagers" looked old as hell.
I give it a 2 out of 10.
What do you guys think ?